> This is a GCC bug (regression, actually, as you've found out) -- no two> ways about it. Although different from the kind Jeff mentioned couple days> back -- that was about wising GCC up to false positives and /not/ emitting> warnings. But here a genuine problem was not complained about, so this is> more serious. Do you plan to open up a bug at gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ ?>

Yes, I have just narrowed down a test case, which is remarkably simple!